The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative study of corn stover pretreated by dilute acid and cellulose solvent‐based lignocellulose fractionation: Enzymatic hydrolysis, supramolecular structure, and substrate accessibility
Open accessAbstract
Liberation of fermentable sugars from recalcitrant biomass is among the most costly steps for emerging cellulosic ethanol production. Here we compared two pretreatment methods (dilute acid, DA, and cellulose solvent and organic solvent lignocellulose fractionation, COSLIF) for corn stover. At a high cellulase loading [15 filter paper units (FPUs) or 12.3 mg cellulase per gram of glucan], glucan digestibilities of the corn stover pretreated by DA and COSLIF were 84% at hour 72 and 97% at hour 24, respectively. At a low cellulase loading (5 FPUs per gram of glucan), digestibility remained as high as 93% at hour 24 for the COSLIF‐pretreated corn stover but reached only ∼60% for the DA‐pretreated biomass. Quantitative determinations of total substrate accessibility to cellulase (TSAC), cellulose accessibility to cellulase (CAC), and non‐cellulose accessibility to cellulase (NCAC) based on adsorption of a non‐hydrolytic recombinant protein TGC were measured for the first time. The COSLIF‐pretreated corn stover had a CAC of 11.57 m 2/g, nearly twice that of the DA‐pretreated biomass (5.89 m 2/g). These results, along with scanning electron microscopy images showing dramatic structural differences between the DA‐ and COSLIF‐pretreated samples, suggest that COSLIF treatment disrupts microfibrillar structures within biomass while DA treatment mainly removes hemicellulose. Under the tested conditions COSLIF treatment breaks down lignocellulose structure more extensively than DA treatment, producing a more enzymatically reactive material with a higher CAC accompanied by faster hydrolysis rates and higher enzymatic digestibility. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2009;103: 715–724. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Wood: Chemistry, ultrastructure, reactions
(1983) · doi:10.1515/9783110839654 · Cited by 2,846
How biotech can transform biofuels
Lynd, L. R., Laser, M. S., Bransby, D., Dale, B. E., Davison, B., Hamilton, R., Himmel, M., Keller, M., McMillan, J. D., Sheehan, J., et al. (2008) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt0208-169 · Cited by 1,121
Self-citation
Cited by
Deconstruction of Lignocellulosic Biomass to Fuels and Chemicals
Chundawat, S. P. S., Beckham, G. T., Himmel, M. E., & Dale, B. E. (2011) · Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-061010-114205 · Cited by 1,017
Zhao, X., Zhang, L., & Liu, D. (2012) · Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining · doi:10.1002/bbb.1350 · Cited by 296
Facile pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass at high loadings in room temperature ionic liquids
Wu, H., Mora‐Pale, M., Miao, J., Doherty, T. V., Linhardt, R. J., & Dordick, J. S. (2011) · Biotechnology and Bioengineering · doi:10.1002/bit.23266 · Cited by 142
Sathitsuksanoh, N., Zhu, Z., & Zhang, Y.-H. P. (2012) · Cellulose · doi:10.1007/s10570-012-9719-z · Cited by 63
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhu, Z., Sathitsuksanoh, N., Vinzant, T., Schell, D. J., McMillan, J. D., & Zhang, Y. ‐. P.
- Venue
- Biotechnology and Bioengineering
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-03-30
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 715-724
- ISSN
- 0006-3592 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0290
- OpenAlex
- W1979184629
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.